Kate Lowell's Blog, page 23

Tuesday Guest Tickle: Never Wrong by Chris McHart

Publisher: MLR-Press

Genre:

Contemporary

M/M Romance

May-December

Age-gap

Length: 34 000 words

Man Love Romance

Amazon US

Amazon UK

All Romance Ebooks

What’s it about?

Jeff was raised to believe love between two men is wrong. Or is it? Can love ever be wrong?

When Jeff meets the much younger Dean, he only knows he wants him, consequences be damned. But things are not as easy, especially after Jeff’s ex calls and announces big news.

And Dean? He thinks the new neighbor is hot, but he’s not interested in something more than a rebound fuck. That’s what he tells himself, at least.

But lust isn’t a good basis for a relationship, more so since Jeff isn’t sure whether he can deal with being gay.

Love is never wrong, but can Jeff accept that?

A Sneak Peek…

He followed me up the stairs, his heavy footfalls much louder than mine. Not that I was small or thin, but I was a bit leaner than his more stocky build. At least he was about my height. I didn’t like to be much smaller or taller than my bed partners.

I imagined his gaze on my ass, knowing if I was the one following him, I would admire his backside shamelessly again. I had no idea if he really watched or not, but in any case, I tried to appear as sexy as possible while climbing from the fourth to fifth floor. When I pushed my key into the lock, I realized he was standing very close to me. Not crowding me, but definitely in my personal space, much nearer than necessary. The hairs on my arms stood up as a new shiver worked itself down my neck to my fingertips. His scent filled the small distance between us, and I noticed for the first time that he smelled really good. So good that I had an urge to turn around and press myself against him.

I resisted, mostly because I didn’t think it would go over too well with the neighbors and because I still had no clue if he had a boyfriend. Or if he would even be interested.

Who is this Chris McHart person, anyway?

Chris McHart is from Germany and while an accountant, writing is Chris’s real passion. Chris likes to spend time with family and has way too many animals that demand constant attention. Chris also enjoys landscaping and cooking.

Whenever Chris has a free minute, it’s spent writing on a laptop, a cup of coffee in hand, deeply lost in the world Chris’s muses have created.

When coming up for some air, you’ll find Chris on a lot of social networks. Check out Chris’s website to see where you can find out more. Chris looks forward to hearing from you!

Website

Facebook

twitter

google+

Filed under: Guest Releases, Tuesday Tickle Tagged: contemporary, May-December, mm romance

Three Dirty Birds Talking about Protagonists and the Kick-Ass Writer

Three Dirty Birds are chirping about Chuck Wendig’s Kick-Ass Writer and what he says about Protagonists.

Kate: It was funny. I was watching Curse of the Black Pearl yesterday with the writers’ commentary turned on, and they were talking about how Elizabeth was the protagonist, because everything that happened was because of choices she made. Then I read Chuck and thought, “Oh, yeah.”

Zoe: I’m having a who’s-the-protagonist thing going on with my WIP. It’s two storylines that eventually converge, and I’m starting to realize that the main character of the second storyline–a late-comer storyline, in fact (I had a whole draft of the novel written before I came up with the second storyline)–is actually making more choices, driving the plot more.

Kate: I’m working keeping the balance between my two boys, so that they’re both pushing toward the inevitable climax. :D

Ana: With the the novella I’m writing right now I’m never really sure who my main main character is. Usually I have one protagonist who’s a little more ‘main character-y’ than the other one. This is the first time their positions keep changing in my head.

Zoe: So, what you’re saying is they’re switches. ;)

Ana: Pretty much! Though neither of them has tried to establish sexual dominance yet.

Kate: That’ll come.

Oh dear, I have the worst case of double entendres today.

Zoe: Ha.

Ana: What I found interesting in this chapter was Chuck’s comment about how it was harder to pull off an unlikeable female character than a male one. Made me wonder, but he’s probably right.

Zoe: I think he is.

Kate: I can totally see that being true. I haven’t really tried it yet, but I have a character that will be less than sweet, simply because she’s very competent and wastes no time on explanations or softening commentary. But I know I’m going to have to walk a very fine line with her.

Zoe: To make it worse, you also get shit if you make your female character too likeable.

Ana: One thing I remember that annoyed me about the Walking Dead fandom was everyone harping on Lori for sleeping with horrible-dude-whose-name-I-forgot, but nobody blamed the dude for sleeping with his best friend’s widow shortly after said friend’s death. (Not that I liked either character much… but I found the fandom reaction kind of scary. It didn’t matter what she did, it was wrong.)

Zoe: Or how Walt’s wife, Skylar, in Breaking Bad was so universally hated…and she was just, really, a typical person.

Kate: I think we’re treading on cultural issues here, and how females displaying characteristics that are typically considered male are hounded for impinging on male territory.

Zoe: Now, actually, that brings up a good point. Because Gemma from Sons of Anarchy is generally well liked by fans (not all, but significantly more than, say, Skylar White or Lori Grimes).

Kate: True, but she’s occasionally put in her place by one of the men, she gives off a decent vibe of being dependent on them, and generally, no matter how tricksy she is, she still bows to their commands.

Zoe: Most importantly, I think, is that she backs whatever the main guy—Clay, then Jax—is going after. Unlike Skylar, who was against Walt’s drug business, and then against the way he handled it, and Lori, who, well, cheated on Rick (WHEN SHE THOUGHT HE WAS DEAD).

Ana: I love how, when she was nice to horrible-dude-whose-name-I-forgot, she was leading him on. When she clearly told him ‘no,’ she was being a horrible person. Of course the poor dude went off the rails.

Kate: Maybe that was the difference–the perception of loyalty. I got the impression, from the way Lori’s character was written after Rick came back, that she felt guilty about hooking up with…Sean?. And the audience picked up on that. In a flock of ducks, if one is injured or less capable, the other ducks will often attack it, and harass it, for no other reason than that it’s displayed some sort of weakness. And the same thing happens in groups of humans. So I wonder if that wasn’t it.

Ana: I’m just wondering if a male character would have evoked the same reaction. I’m trying to think of weak male characters but all that comes to mind are the Winchester brothers and their perfect manly tears of man pain.

Zoe: Speaking of man pain…I liked the “Discover the sadness” tip. I like finding that in stories I’m reading, and especially in the ones I’m writing.

Ana: It’s quite often what motivates me to write a story.

Kate: That little bit of loneliness, or feeling like they don’t belong. Yeah, that’s an important one. I liked his caution about turning your character into a Mary Sue or a Gary Stu (though I’ve always called him Marty Stu).

Ana:I always called him Gary, which reminds me of the rival in the Pokemon anime, who got ten badges even though you can only get eight…(http://i.ytimg.com/vi/z6fC7AObvUc/hqdefault.jpg because relevant)

Kate: Lol.

Zoe: He also brings up a good point in that something in your character’s (or characters’) make-up has to reach across the abyss between story and audience, so that they can identify with the character enough to be willing to follow him (her them) through the story.

Kate: I’ve always thought that was the basis of the ‘Write What You Know’ advice. Write the emotional experience you know well, that you’ve gone through, and no matter what the actual plot is, it will resonate with the reader, who will likely have experienced that same emotion in some different way.

Ana: Yup, it’s all about hitting them right in the feels.

Zoe: That’s what novels really are, aren’t they? Little pillboxes with emotion inside.

Kate: So, protagonists? Anything else that stuck out in this chapter?

Ana:Just in tip 15 he mentions knowing your protagonist and building their history from there instead of the other way around. That’s what I usually do, but I couldn’t name it before. It’s like I know certain facts about my characters, and then I try to figure out how they developed those habits which teaches me their history.

Zoe: It seems much more efficient that way. Then you only need to figure out the pertinent parts of their histories, instead of what they ate for breakfast at age 9 (if that’s not going to be pertinent). This is what I usually do too. “Character behaves this way. Why? What in his background explains that tendency?”

Ana: It’s kind of fun, isn’t it? I also liked how he mentioned in tip 17 that the antagonist doesn’t have to be another character but can also just be some sort of antagonistic force. An obstacle. Whatever.

Zoe: I want Kate to include a tornado of biting squirrels in a story.

Kate: That’s the third weresquirrel epic. I’m glad to hear the whole ‘working backwards from your character’ thing isn’t just an artifact of my weird workflow. I was always worried I was doing it wrong. Tip #8 fits into this too, where he talks about know who your character is, what they want, what conflicts and fears come into play. I tell my daughter all the time that what’s interesting about a character isn’t what they can do, but what they can’t.

I didn’t find much in this chapter that was new to me, though there are always a few old favourites I love to see and coo over. It felt to me like it had been stretched out over the chapter, when it could have been handled in a couple of pages. What do you other birds think?

Ana: I’m skimming a lot because it can’t hold my attention. I guess there isn’t enough there that’s new to make me want to read so many pages and the humor kind of wears off after a while.

Zoe: The format makes it a little tedious. First, there’s the conceit of “25 things,” so he’s going to come up with 25 every chapter, no matter what, and then the fact that it’s essentially a list means there’s no flow from one point to another. They’re all little islands, floating near each other.

Side Note: During off-blog discussions, we’ve decided that this will be the last week for Chuck, as we aren’t enjoying this book the way we enjoyed the other two. It’s possible that it’s just the format, or maybe the things we are looking for are not in this book. So, next week, you can look forward to James Scott Bell’s Revision and Self-Editing for Publication.

Filed under: Three Dirty Birds Talk, writing Tagged: Kick-Ass Writer, protagonists, writing advice

Three Dirty Birds and Story Structure as per Chuck Wendig

Over at Zoe’s blog. Can I just mention that we’re getting a bit frustrated with Chuck’s book? It’s definitely not meant to be read in large chunks.

Filed under: Three Dirty Birds Talk, writing Tagged: Kick-Ass Writer, story structure, writing advice

Nano Update

As I suspected, day job is doing it’s best to rob my words of their time in the limelight. However, I have managed about 6K, which isn’t up to the minimum, but I’m writing, eh? That’s pretty awesome.

So far, I’m just farting around the story figuring out a little more about my boys. I’m still not entirely sure of when Kev actually starts looking at Moe as a love interest, though I know it’s before Christmas. Moe figures out he likes Kev a lot sooner than my oblivious little psych student. (Yes, I do love irony. :) )

Parent teacher interviews tonight, then more dayjob stuff, but I’m going to try to squeeze in another thousand words before I fall asleep in my chair. Thank God for coffee.

Filed under: writing Tagged: Ken 'n Mo, mm romance, NaNo, NaNoWriMo

Three Dirty Birds Plotting Stories with Chuck Wendig

We’re over at Ana’s blog, which as you know is the site for all plotting and mayhem, right?

Wait, what do you mean it’s not that kind of plot?

Filed under: Three Dirty Birds Talk, writing Tagged: Kick-Ass Writer, plotting, writing advice

Tuesday Tickle: The NaNo Book!

With my typical crappy working title, that will probably end up being the title, because I have zero talent for them. But it’s a fun little NA contemporary, set at a fictional university, and drawing on some stories from my own college days. :)

It’s even more first drafty than usual, because this is NaNo and you don’t comb back through things in Nano. I’m just under the necessary average per day right now, because I got less than 600 in yesterday. I suspect that’s how it’s going to be for the next month, because of dayjob, but it’s still a good pile of words compared to last month, so I’m happy.

Anyway, here’s me screwing with Kev a bit. :) (Hey, it’s my job!)

Four hours later he crawled out of bed, ran through the shower in record time—blessing the fact that RAs got a private room with their own shower—and headed out to the lecture theatre with his backpack over his shoulder, a bagel in one hand, and a cup of crappy instant coffee in the other.

The seats were about half full, and he sighed as he fell into one next to Badge Murchison, who was in his fourth year in Business and had been the other RA on Third Badlam last year. “Morning.”

“And good morning to you. Rough night last night?”

“Worked. I’m running on less than four hours sleep. Please tell me we aren’t having any ‘activities’ tonight.”

“Naw. Just getting assignments and getting everyone moved in. Though anyone who checked in yesterday already has their floor assignments.”

“They do?”

“Makes sense. Don’t want to move them in, then have to move them again and reinspect the rooms.”

“Shit. I should have nosed around more last night.” Kev craned his neck to look around. “I wonder if they’re gonna let me move. I’d like to get into something quieter.”

“You did alright with Third Bedlam last year.”

“It was exhausting. And I’m trying to get into Honours for fourth year, so I need time to study. I don’t want to spend all my waking hours breaking up crazy stunts or shutting down parties.”

Badge elbowed him and jerked his chin at the podium. “I think you’re going to find out soon enough.” Kev looked toward the front of the room, where the Dean of Student Housing was shuffling papers while the IT guys got the microphone and the projector running for him. Kev sipped at his coffee and crossed his fingers discreetly in the folds of his backpack.

The Dean leaned forward and spoke into the microphone. “Good morning everyone. Good to see so many happy, shiny faces in the room. I’d like to welcome you back to the start of what I’m sure will be a wonderful academic year, with many successes.” He looked down at his papers. “Some of you already have your room assignments, but you’ll get your master keys today. Just to be sure we’ve covered everyone, I’m going to go through the list house by house. Please note your residence, floor, and wings, so you can claim the appropriate keys when you come down.” Then he began to read from the list.

It didn’t take too long. Halfway through the list, the Dean read out, “Kevin Hobbs, Badlam Hall, Fourth Floor, North Wing,” and the sinking feeling in Kev’s stomach was confirmed.

“Fuck me,” he whispered under his breath and closed his eyes for a moment to collect himself.

“Hey,” Badge said, nudging his shoulder. “You’ll be fine. They don’t give Fourth Bedlam to just anyone

Filed under: Tuesday Tickle Tagged: college boys, contemporary, Kev 'n Mo, NA, NaNo

Three Dirty Birds Talk about Chuck’s Sentences

Three Dirty Birds are back from vacation–uh, sick leave/work overload, to chat about Chuck Wendig’s Kick-Ass Writer, and his chapter on Sentences.

Ana: *brushes the sand out of her feathers* We’re talking about sentences? I can write sentences. And fragments.

Zoe: The thing that impressed me most in this chapter was the revelation that there are (give or take) 15,000 sentences in the average novel. It impressed me and exhausted me. That’s why I needed the vacation.

Kate: I found this chapter a bit repetitive. Sentences are the building block, they convey information, they have a certain structure, for God’s sake don’t string four of them together with commas.

Ana: I thought it was kind of funny how he talked about the danger of sentence fragments in tip number 5, and then went on to use a lot of them in tip number 6.

Kate: I love irony.

Zoe: He does admit to using them. Tip #5 would have been more useful if he’d been able to explain why some sentence fragments work, and some make me want to claw at the pages with my fingernails. What is it that makes some go with the flow and others interrupt?

Ana: I only wish I knew.

Zoe: A recent novel I read, which was otherwise very good, kept tripping me up with sentence fragments. Yet other writers use them almost invisibly.

Kate: I think it comes down to when you use them. For emphasis. A series of actions. And unexpected emotional response. And then you go back to standard, almost invisible structure. Fragments are for things you want to point out.

Zoe: I think, too, sometimes fragments are structured like they should be part of a sentence, and the sentence is missing, so it throws me off (which is what I think happened a lot with that novel).

Kate: I think you’re right. A fragment needs to be able to stand on its own. If it can’t, it’s just bad grammar.

Zoe:(I’m pulling up the book to find an example, but it may take me a bit. Just go on with the other tips!)

Kate:Okay. I liked how he talked about keeping sentences simple. Looking at my NaNo novel, I can see sentences already that I’m going to have to rework, because–while they get information across–there’s a sharper, snappier way to do it. And that usually involves simpler sentences, and more of them.

Ana: A lot of my revision process is making sentences simpler. Cutting unnecessary words and making concepts clearer. I find shorter sentences often pack more punch than longer ones do.

Kate: Shorter sentences are easier to write, too, if you want to be clear. It’s really hard to make a long sentence clear. But short sentences don’t have as big a job, so it’s easier. Like the difference between changing a tire and changing out an engine.

Ana: I liked how he said: “Think of each sentence like a tiny iteration of a cliffhanger. Each is an opportunity to convince the reader to keep on reading.” I’ve never thought of it that way, but it makes sense.

Kate: It totally does. A reader can forgive one bad sentence, if the next one is at least passable. But there’s a certain average of excellence that all the sentences need to have in order to keep the reader from giving up in disbelief.

Ana: Or boredom. Or confusion.

Zoe:(I found one! I actually found a lot, but most don’t break the flow. Here it is, with a couple sentences lead-up: “‘They’re going to kill us, Jack.’ He reached under his seat, lifted the .45 into his lap. The man coming back toward the Discovery now.”)

Ana: That’s just weird because the man wasn’t referred to in the sentence leading up to it.

Kate: No, but I bet he was before that. But Zoe’s right, that fragment shouldn’t have been a fragment.

Zoe: There were six paragraphs between man mentions.

Ana: It just looks like someone wrote ‘coming’ when it should have been ‘came’ or ‘was coming.’

Kate: Wow. That’s a bit of space.

Zoe: Yeah, I get what he was trying to do, but it broke the flow. There was probably one every other chapter.

Kate: It almost worked though. He was so close!

Ana: I guess the sentence fragments that work don’t totally stand on their own. They’re supported by the sentences leading up to them or the ones that follow.

Zoe: Yes, I think that’s probably true.

Kate: I think you’re right. They have to be quite close to what you’re referring to, because they’re dependant on your understanding of what’s going on at that moment, and what’s uppermost in your mind.

I have a bit of an argument with him about the ‘there is’ construction. Sometimes there is no other way to put a sentence that doesn’t bugger up the ones before or after it. And I don’t think there’s anything wrong with it, as long as you aren’t using it once a paragraph. Some of these ‘never use this’ rules just kind of wreck people’s voice.

Ana:I use it, but I don’t like using it if I can think of somethnig else. “There is…” always sounds to me like describing something to someone who can’t see it.

Zoe:I’m not a fan of it, because so often there is a way to rewrite it. But if you try everything, and there’s no way around it, then there’s no reason not to use it. It’s when it’s the default go-to that it gets problematic.

Kate: And I think that’s my argument. How many people say “Only use this if there’s no way around it”? I think you’re the first one I’ve heard. They just say “Don’t use this!” and then people who are stuck feel like they aren’t skilled, because they’re in a situation where not using it requires a complete rework that destroys some nice sentences. I don’t like absolutes, because I don’t think they work in an artistic medium. (That being said, there are things that you really want to think hard about using, doing, writing about, before you actually jump in. Some things create a backlash, so you want to be sure you’re prepared before you bend that ‘rule’.)

Ana: Most of the things you’re told not to do you can probably find used in successful fiction. It’s all a matter of moderation and knowing what you’re doing.

Kate: Know when to break the rules.

Zoe:If it makes you feel better, there are a number of instances of “there was” and “there were” in Chuck’s Double Dead.

Kate: I love irony. :)

Ana: I liked tip #21: Beware the Sentence With a Big Ass, where he compares junk language to junk food. It’s just easy to remember. And it works because everyone likes junk food from time to time. I think the occasional use of junk language can lend flavor to a voice.

Zoe: (I had to look up “pleonasm.” It’s my new favorite word now.)

Kate: Pleonasm is an awesome word. It just rolls off the tongue, like euglena. (Don’t ask.) Chuck does a good job of getting things into plain, easy to understand language. I was glad to see him say that you didn’t need to be a grammar expert to write a good sentence. Sure, knowing stuff about grammar helps, especially when someone’s trying to explain something to you, but if you have a good ear, you can write a good sentence without being able to diagram it.

Zoe: “Fungible” is another favorite, but it hasn’t appeared in this book so far.

Kate: We should suggest that to him.

Zoe: The Kick-Ass Writer Second Edition: Now with More Fungible. And less pleonasm, but I’ll get to that complaint a couple chapters from now.

Filed under: Three Dirty Birds Talk, writing Tagged: grammar, Kick-Ass Writer, sentence structure, writing advice

It’s NaNo Time!

Now to gather some spare time (*falls down laughing*) and get my 1700 words in for the day.

I know, right?

Filed under: writing Tagged: NaNoWriMo

The Dirty Birds are NOT on Vacation

Nope. Not at all. And this definitely isn’t us on the beach somewhere in our bathing suits.

Actually, it’s been quite a week, so the Birds are going to take a week’s ‘nest’ time. Two sick birds, and one that’s swamped in dayjob, does not a happy flock make.

See you here next week, same Bird Time, same Bird Channel!

Filed under: Three Dirty Birds Talk, Uncategorized, writing Tagged: hiatus, vacation, wish we were in Mexico, writing advice

Three Dirty Birds Describe Chuck Wendig (or what he thinks about description)

Zoe’s got our weekly wrap-up and today’s post on description.

Filed under: Three Dirty Birds Talk, writing Tagged: description, Kick-Ass Writer, telling, writing advice